By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Reggie talks about 3d parties, Nintendo not good at creating certain games

Kasz216 said:
jarrod said:
Kasz216 said:
burning_phoneix said:
Nintendo did (and did well) practically every genre in videogame history. Even horror, with Eternal Darkness.


Uhhh...Eternal Darkness was made by Silicon Knights. Nintendo just published it.

Mostly, but not 100% true.

For example, the Sanity meter was a Nintendo concept, hence why they own the patent for it.

 

Nintendo also owned a good chunk of SK at the time.  Hell, Dyack used to say SK *was* Nintendo.

Ahhh... so that explains a lot of the development being considered "nintendo" in articles i read about it.  I thought it was just shoddy website reporting.

Nintendo still holds a (small) stake in SK even today.  Kinda surprising, I'd have figured they would've sold it off by now.



Around the Network
JelDeRebel said:
Eternal Darkness remains one of the best games on the GC. The wii needs more Horror and Psychological thrillers. (not the RE survival horror type)

Nintendo needs new IP's. Mario and zelda are getting old. they feel like the same game over and over again. plus they're being casualized.
I was looking forward to Sadness and Winter. Sadness is vaporware and Winter didn't find a publisher.

The developers of Winter couldn't find a publisher. because publishers said they haven't got a clue about the Wii demographic. Publishers think mature games won't sell on the Wii.


it's quite simple though...
hardcore gamers: want more mature games like PS360. turned away from nintendo due to lack of said games. Nintendo's hardcore IP's are casualized
casual gamers: Wii's core audience won't buy many games. they don't care about sequels of new IP's (e.g. Guitar Hero). they can't distinguish great games from mediocre. they look at boxart. they buy Super Mario because it's well known, yet have no knowledge of the series history.

Wow, I believe your 'simple' explanation isn't based on any facts. 

First, how is Nintendo's 'hardcore' franchises staying the same, yet being 'casualized' at the same time.  Plus, what franchises are you even talking about?  Please explain how Metroid, Mario (either Galaxy or NSMBW), or Zelda are somehow more 'casual' than earlier games in those series?  (what does 'casualization' even mean?)

 

Second, how is guitar hero an example of Wii owners not caring about sequels?  According to VG chartz, these are what the games sold (in millions) on the various platforms.  The number in parenthesis is the percent drop from the previous game:

Game                                               Wii                    PS3                  XBOX360

Guitar Hero 3                                   4.39  (--)            1.96   (--)        4.35   (--)

Guitar Hero: World Tour                  3.39   (23%)      1.51  (23%)     2.40   (45%)

Guitar Hero 5                                  0.84    (75%)       0.61 (60%)     0.73   (70%)

Total drop from GH3 to GH5                        81%                 69%                  83%

The data, at least in the case of guitar hero, indicates that guitar hero just isn't a powerhouse franchise anymore.  The drop on Wii is similair to the drop on the other consoles as well.  So, I ask again: how is this evidence of Wii owners not liking sequels?

 

Third, why do you think that Wii gamers only buy games based on the cover art?  I will direct you to this link: http://g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/701400/PS3-Owners-Buy-The-Most-Movie-Tie-In-Games-Wii-Owners-Buy-The-Least.html               

Nielson did a study and found that PS3 owners were most likely to buy movie tie in games (which are generally considered to be crap), and Wii owners were least likely to buy a movie tie in games.  Obviously, Wii owners are not buying their games based on just the cover (maybe Wii owners just hate movies?).  

I would put forth that Wii owners, in general, buy games that they think are fun and Wii owners (in general) could care less about 'story' or 'unlockables'.  Look at Just Dance-- it is selling like crazy, got horrible reviews from critics because it was to simple/crude/no 'depth'.  However, go look up Just Dance on Youtube and you will see that people are having fun with the game.

 

Fourth-- you are going to have to define 'hardcore' gamer for any discusion on why they 'left Nintendo' (if they actually did 'leave' Nintendo, which I think is BS.  If anything, the so-called hardcore left Nintendo during the N64 and GC days).

 

Last point (for now): Wii owners do not buy Mario games because it has Mario in it.  If that was the case, then every Mario game would have sold the same amount.  They have not.  According to VGChartz, there are 11 Wii games with Mario in the title:

1. New Super Mario Bros. Wii       12.69m

2. Mario Kart Wii      21.46m

3.  Super Mario Galaxy    8.53m

4. Mario & Sonic at the Olympic Winter Games     3.00m

5.   Mario & Sonic at the Olympic Games        7.55m

6.  Super Mario Galaxy 2    0.00m

7.     Mario Party 8         7.03m

8.   New Play Control! Mario Power Tennis      1.20m

9.   Super Paper Mario        2.90m

10.    Mario Strikers Charged          2.21m

11.   Mario Super Sluggers          1.26m

 

Again, Wii owners are obviously not buying games just because Mario is in the game.  Otherwise games such as Mario Super Sluggers would have sold more than 1.26 million, or why Galaxy (depsite it being out longer) is being outsold by the months old NSMBW.



Nintendo Wii is fine. Thankyou.



MY ZELDA COLLECTION
MasterZack said:
Nintendo Wii is fine. Thankyou.

/end thread



Davey1983 said:
...

Third, why do you think that Wii gamers only buy games based on the cover art?  I will direct you to this link: http://g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/701400/PS3-Owners-Buy-The-Most-Movie-Tie-In-Games-Wii-Owners-Buy-The-Least.html               

Nielson did a study and found that PS3 owners were most likely to buy movie tie in games (which are generally considered to be crap), and Wii owners were least likely to buy a movie tie in games.  Obviously, Wii owners are not buying their games based on just the cover (maybe Wii owners just hate movies?).  

...

About the Nielsen study: no, that's not what the study really indicated (we had a short thread about it, see this post of mine and the follow-ups).

 



"All you need in life is ignorance and confidence; then success is sure." - Mark Twain

"..." - Gordon Freeman

Around the Network

Kid Icarus as a FPS/platformer

You basically use your swords (WM+ ala RS2) and your bow (ala WSR) and have a tripple jump (wings). Your upgrades would be in swords and bows (automatic bow at 3000 RPM)



OoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoO

WereKitten said:
Davey1983 said:
...

Third, why do you think that Wii gamers only buy games based on the cover art?  I will direct you to this link: http://g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/701400/PS3-Owners-Buy-The-Most-Movie-Tie-In-Games-Wii-Owners-Buy-The-Least.html               

Nielson did a study and found that PS3 owners were most likely to buy movie tie in games (which are generally considered to be crap), and Wii owners were least likely to buy a movie tie in games.  Obviously, Wii owners are not buying their games based on just the cover (maybe Wii owners just hate movies?).  

...

About the Nielsen study: no, that's not what the study really indicated (we had a short thread about it, see this post of mine and the follow-ups).

 

Fair enough-- the study does not come out and say that directly.  It says that those that buy licensed games spend more money on Playstation products.  However, the implication is that PS3 owners buy more movie games than Wii owners.   However, the argument can be made-- and I believe you pointed that out, is that a Wii owner could buy 4 movie games while the PS3 owner could buy 10 games with only 1 being a movie game according to the study.  I don't believe that to be the case, but it could be.

 

Either way, the point I am making is that the claim that Wii owners just buy games based on the covers is not based on any factual evidence.   



^No, the implication is simply that buyers of movie games with a PS3 spend more in video games than buyers of movie games with a Wii.
Frankly, I think that the main discriminator is the fact that Wii games are cheaper, thus even with totally similar buying habits you would have that more money is spent on the PS3 side. But there's also the fact that even in those households were movie games are bought, I'd say that if a PS3 is present there's a bigger chance of at least a member of the family being a dedicated gamer interested in a wider array of game genres.

Going back to the point you were making, of course saying that wii owners buy games based on cover is silly, as all general statements are. I think you'll concede, though, that among the Wii owners -out of the three latest consoles- there's probably the biggest market of people that can fall for tie-ins and shovelware and licensed icons. Simply because the Wii has extended into a market of people that were never that interested in video games in the first place.



"All you need in life is ignorance and confidence; then success is sure." - Mark Twain

"..." - Gordon Freeman

^I agree that the report only states that households that buy movie games spend more money on playstation products.  BUT the implication from reading the report is that PS3 owners buy more movie tie-in games.  I also hold that the ten dollar difference in games (assuming these households only buy new games) is not enough to account for the difference seen in the study.  

However, without access to the actual data neither one of us can claim we are right.  We will just have to agree to disagree. 

 

I, however, do not agree with the thinking that Wii owners, in general, are more likely to buy games based on tie-ins and licensing.  I'd argue that the so-called 'hardcore' gamers are actually more susceptible to such things (the report actually mentions that buyers of movie tie-in games tend to buy games from specialty stores). 

Whether I am right or you are right, my original point still stands: there is no data that that supports the notion that Wii owners are more likely than PS3 or XBOX owners to buy games based on tie-ins or, as the original poster put it, on the covers.



alfredofroylan said:
I'm wondering something. In todays world most of the games use some kind of engine (Unreal, CryEngine, etc.) I know Metroid prime uses its own engine .... so Why Nintendo never re-uses their own engine in other games.

they do if it makes sense (Mario Galaxy 1 & 2 for example). Would you really want to have generic game x made with engine y just to save money or a little time or even to say we used engine y? I'm sure that they (just like every other software developer) reuses a lot of code and steal the appropriate parts of old engines to make new ones. However, Nintendo doesn't need to brag about the engine being used to gain interest in their game.




If you drop a PS3 right on top of a Wii, it would definitely defeat it. Not so sure about the Xbox360. - mancandy
In the past we played games. In the future we watch games. - Forest-Spirit
11/03/09 Desposit: Mod Bribery (RolStoppable)  vg$ 500.00
06/03/09 Purchase: Moderator Privilege  vg$ -50,000.00

Nordlead Jr. Photo/Video Gallery!!! (Video Added 4/19/10)